Jessica Kate Patullo
Introduction
Ms Jessica Kate Patullo was a class teacher at Kelvedon Hatch Community Primary School in Brentwood, Essex, from September 2022. From October 2023 she was in a relationship with a man — Person A in the regulatory decision — who had been convicted of offences involving indecent images of primary school-aged children and was on the Sex Offenders’ Register until February 2026. He told her of this within weeks of the relationship starting; she did not tell her school for more than a year. A Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) panel found the non-disclosure a serious safeguarding failure lacking in integrity, though not dishonest, and the decision maker for the Secretary of State imposed a prohibition order despite the panel recommending none. She is barred from teaching indefinitely, and cannot apply to have the order set aside until May 2028 at the earliest.
Background Information
According to the TRA decision, Ms Patullo commenced employment as a class teacher at Kelvedon Hatch Community Primary School on 1 September 2022. In January 2019, Person A committed offences relating to possession of indecent images of primary school-aged children; in February 2021 he was sentenced and placed on the Sex Offenders’ Register until February 2026. Around October or November 2023, he told Ms Patullo of his conviction and register status. A police visit to the couple on 3 November 2024 made clear the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) should have been informed; on 26 November 2024 she disclosed to headteacher Witness A. A disciplinary hearing followed on 7 February 2025, and she ceased employment at the School on 30 April 2025.
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
Adjudicated vs. alleged. Jessica Kate Patullo was not accused of any criminal offence, and no allegation against her was tested in a criminal court. What follows are findings of a Teaching Regulation Agency professional conduct panel, made on the civil balance of probabilities and published as a regulatory record. She admitted the core failure — not disclosing her partner’s conviction and register status — and the panel found her lacking in integrity, but expressly found dishonesty not proven, accepting she genuinely believed she had no duty to disclose.
Person A’s offences concerned possession of indecent images of primary school-aged children; her understanding was that the conviction was for possession, not production or distribution. When he told her about it in around October or November 2023, she asked him to speak to his probation officer about the implications for her teaching role. He came back reassured: no concerns had been raised. She also said an April 2024 police check produced no instruction to disclose. She later told the panel: “I think I made it clear the school were unaware”. She reviewed the School’s safeguarding policy and staff Code of Conduct in October 2023, found them “vague”, and concluded she had no obligation to report.
That changed after the 3 November 2024 police visit. On 26 November 2024 she disclosed Person A’s history to Witness A; the School immediately sought LADO advice and began a safeguarding risk assessment. The panel found allegations 1(a), 1(b) and 2 — admitted by Ms Patullo — proven: by failing to disclose, she failed to disclose “a potentially serious safeguarding concern”, depriving the School of the chance to run its own risk assessment. In oral evidence she accepted, in hindsight, “I should’ve reported it immediately”, describing it as “an error of professional judgement”.
On integrity, the panel applied the Wingate principles and found her conduct “went beyond a mere lapse in professional judgement and fell significantly below the standards of integrity expected of a teacher entrusted with the welfare of children”: a trained teacher had failed to apply her own “err on the side of caution” practice to her private life. On dishonesty, applying Ivey v Genting Casinos, the panel found the opposite: it was not presented with evidence that her genuine belief — that probation or police would have told her if disclosure were required — was anything other than as she described, and it “considered her to have presented as consistently straightforward in that evidence”. Accepting Person A’s second-hand reassurance was “unwise”, but her judgement was flawed, not dishonest. Allegation 3(b) was not proven.
Public Reaction and Consequences
Ms Patullo was present throughout the hearing from 5 to 8 May 2026, represented by Nicholas Kennan of Cornwall Street Barristers, and gave oral evidence. The panel found the conduct was undeniably connected to pupils’ safeguarding, but gave heavy weight to her “extensive insight and remorse”: admissions, an NSPCC safeguarding masterclass completed in January 2026, and a written reflection that her failure “had the potential to impact pupils as the school was unable to formally assess risk”. It found the risk of repetition “so low as to be negligible”, noted her previous good history, and recommended no prohibition order — publication of the findings would suffice. The panel also accepted the conduct appeared out of character.
Current Status
The determination is dated 8 May 2026. Decision maker Marc Cavey, deciding for the Secretary of State on 21 May 2026, disagreed with the panel’s recommendation: given “the serious nature of the misconduct found”, and her behaviour’s likely impact on parents’ trust, “it is necessary to impose a prohibition order in order to maintain public confidence in the profession”. Ms Patullo is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. She may apply for the order to be set aside, but not until 21 May 2028, and this is not an automatic right. She has 28 days from notice of the order to appeal to the High Court. The decision was published in May 2026.
Impact on Their Career/Life
The prohibition order forecloses Ms Patullo’s teaching career in England despite a panel recommendation that she keep it. The findings — unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, with breaches of the Teachers’ Standards and Keeping Children Safe in Education — are permanently published as a public regulatory record. The underlying circumstances also carried their own weight: her partner remained subject to Sex Offenders’ Register notification requirements until February 2026, and the relationship itself became the subject of police attention and a formal safeguarding risk assessment at her former school.